To Comfort the Afflicted and Afflict the Comfortable

Finley Peter Dunne was one of the first syndicated newspaper columnists. He was born shortly after the Civil War and died during the Great Depression.  He was a writer and satirist on the vein of Mark Twain (who was a contemporary of his).  His preferred character for the dispensation of wit and wisdom was a “Mr. Dooley” who owned a bar on the southside of Chicago and spoke on all issues, political and social.  Based in Chicago, Dunne became the first in a long line of newspaper writers who could make us laugh and think all at the same time.  He was followed by writers like Mike Royko, Erma Bombeck and Charles Krauthammer. 

Dunne wrote at a time when newspapers were king.  Chicago had nine daily papers during Dunne’s time.  This was typical of every major city in the nation.  These papers made absolutely no attempt at even-handed dissemination of “just the facts, Ma’am.”  No, they were blatantly and happily partisan.  People chose the Republican paper, the Democratic paper, the socialist or farmers grange paper.  The family that was lucky enough to have two cents to spend on a daily paper expected to read stories that reflected their biases as much as they informed their minds. 

That ideological slant lessened over the years. Somewhere along the line papers decided that they needed to work on the unbiased truth, but it is hard to keep one’s proclivities at bay.  They sneak in when you are not looking.  [If someone you like has “co-workers” and someone you don’t like has “henchmen” there is a good chance bias is at work.  But you knew that.]

But in the days of Dunne and his avatar, barkeep Dooley, bias added a welcome patina to straight news, not to mention a tongue-in-cheek column.  When waxing philosophical about the purpose of the news itself, Dooley said that its job was to “comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.” 

It is instructive for our current times that Mr. Dooley was a frequent critic of President Theodore Roosevelt.  Instead of reacting with calls for censure, Teddy loved reading Dunne’s column and its humorous but critical jabs at him.   Of course, Theodore Roosevelt was a man immensely comfortable in his own skin.  He also understood the purpose and function of a free press. 

I had a chance to see the press’s ability to both comfort and afflict this last week.  I live at Sandpipers Resort, an area that has twice this year seen extraordinary flooding.  This flooding was not the result of bad weather—the park has been there for decades without catastrophic flooding—but bad planning.  We have become the victims of not nature, but nurture.  What was worse, if there is something worse than seeing your retirement home go under water twice in a summer, was the complete lack of response on the part of the governmental agencies that we called for help.  Calls went unanswered.  Messages, left by the dozens, went unacknowledged.  On the rare occasions when we were able to talk to a living person, we got contradictory answers.  Mostly, we were ignored.

All of that changed when local news outlets were alerted to our problems.  They came, they saw, they reported.  It was the sudden attention from the news media that finally brought a member of the Hidalgo County Drainage District out to Sandpipers to see what they had wrought.  A picture is worth a thousand words, and the news had provided lots of pictures.  We still don’t have answers, but we were able to ask the questions. 

When you attack the news because you don’t like what they say, you also attack a voice that might be telling you what you need to hear.  You attack a chance to use your critical thinking skills, your judgement, your intelligence and your curiosity.  The news gives a voice to people who otherwise might not be heard.   Can they be biased?  Yes, to a more or less degree.  That is where you, as the consumer, have to use your judgement.  It will make you a smarter person. 

Thinking, not censoring, helps you keep the faith.